Wednesday, January 19, 2011

2011 ZiPS Projections - Los Angeheim Angels

The Angels are a team essentially in water-treading mode. Bourjos’s defense is good enough that he’ll be a solid player in the majors and Mike Trout is ridiculous, but 2 of the Angels’ best offensive players, Hunter and Abreu, are getting up there in years. The rotation is solid, though the decline of Scott Kazmir is very sad; let him be a cautionary tale for any that thinks your young star ace is guaranteed to continue to be awesome (if Mark Prior and the other 730 previous examples weren’t enough). The team still needs him as there’s really not a lot of pitching depth in the upper minors (pitchers like Chatwood and Richards should have better projections in future years as they’re not ready yet, though there’s little star potential).

Los Angeheim isn’t going to catch up on the Rangers just sitting around, but there’s still enough talent to make this a .500 team. One thing the Angels really need to do is channel the nearly-free, amazing bullpens Bill Stoneman used to put together (like the Rays did last year). Last year’s 4.03 bullpen ERA was pretty disapponting for a team that used to find 130 ERA+ relievers easier than Dayton Moore finds sabermetric punching bags.

Am I a bad person for hoping Rodriguez’s control gets worse so I can call him BB-Rod?

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

I don't remember seeing a prospect so high up on a team's offensive projection. I realize this says more about the projected Angel's hitters than Trout, but how often has a 19 year old had a case that he deserves to be a starter since ZiPs started?

So Jeff Mathis got a $1.7M dollar 1 year contract for a season in which ZiPS is projecting a 60 OPS+. And while there's more to defense for a catcher than just throwing, his arm only rates as fair. Scioscia's fetish for this guy puts even Dusty Baker's exploits with Neifi Perez to shame. At least Neifi was a good defender.

I think I would take the under on Abreu for this year; his bat looked slow and weak last year. Nonetheless, it's going to be a travesty when he goes one and done on HOF balloting in 8 years or so. He's not a first ballot player (whatever that means) or anything, but I'd rather see him in than out and I can't imagine a scenario in which he gets serious consideration.

As mediocre as this team looks here, it looks like it still projects better than Oakland....and with Trout the upside's a lot higher too.

The A's offensive projections did not include DeJesus, Willingham and Matsui, so with them I think the upside for this year is better. Willingham has a 117 OPS+ from Washington, but I couldn't find projections for DeJesus or Matsui on their respective former teams. Maybe those should be added to the A's projections.

For pitching, the A's also now have Balfour and Fuentes, who both have very good OPS+ numbers. Given all that, the A's look like the better squad on paper for this year at least.

It's completely baffling to me that teams keep giving Rodney high-leverage jobs. I understand that the whole "proven closer" thing dies hard, but when I watched baseball before becoming acquainted with the analytical side of the game, my impression of Rodney was only ever overwhelmingly as an extremely shaky guy whom no manager could possibly trust - he always seemed very "hittable" and of course he walked everyone in sight. Furthermore, it always seemed like the managers didn't trust him, which makes it even more confusing that they keep coming back to him as a closer.

I realize this says more about the projected Angel's hitters than Trout, but how often has a 19 year old had a case that he deserves to be a starter since ZiPs started?

I can't think of any. I'd be surprised if that wasn't the best projection for a 19-year-old that I've ever done.

For what it's worth, Wil Myers who is a few months older than Trout, but they are from the same HS draft class got a projection of a 96 OPS+. That along with this Trout projection have to be one of the best ever for a first full season HS kid.

NDFA from High Point in '09 ago who dropped his arm slot and found surprising success - career ERA of 1.36 in 91.2 inn (24 in AA), w/ 67 h, 2 hr, 13 bb, 97 k. Not a lot of pro experience and somewhat of a longshot, but could be their next Darren O'Day.

I don't know how to feel about this. Getting Napoli is fantastic, because he's been one of my favourite "Free Player X" guys. Getting rid of (some?) of Wells' contract might also be good (depending on how Rogers spends the money). But it would be a bitter pill to swallow if the centerpiece of the Roy Halladay trade was essentially traded for salary relief from Wells' contract.

6:47pm: The Jays might not be sending any money to Los Angeles in the trade, tweets Shi Davidi of The Canadian Press.

This would actually not surprise me. I can see the angels FO rationalizing this as getting a Crawford-like player for less years and money AND they get rid of 10 million bucks of what they consider dead weight.

From what I gather the first value (Ex, VG, FR, etc) refers to the player's arm quality, and the 2nd value (numerical) refers to their range?

At times it appears that the lower the number means a better fielder. Other times, it appears that a number closer to 100 is the better fielder. I know the number corresponds with the rating system in DMB. I've read the FAQ, searched Google, and cannot find a thorough explanation for what the values represent specifically.

First number is range w/ roughly a 6 or 7 run gap b/w bands. Second is error rate - indexed to 100, which is avg for the position. A "200" commits twice as many errors as a guy with a "100".
Catcher values are arm values.
In the game, outfielders also get arm values and catchers also get range, error, and pb values.